Walker was duly elected, Democrats didn't like what he proposed, and they forced a recall. They lost that recall.

Democrats in Wisconsin brought his upon themselves.

I don't think it has any national meaning, no matter how much people want to make it so either way.

To be fair, the GOP had a ton of outside the state funding, where as the democrats did not. This was pretty well bought and paid for by outside forces to the state, rather then the people actually in the state.

It illustrates that "citizens united" style elections can have a significant impact on elections, that people won't recall someone based on political differences alone, and that big business will start lobbying across many states to chip away at labor laws because the divide and conquer tactics worked.

As far as the presidential election...no, it doesn't mean sqaut. If you are a republican you may feel otherwise, but that is because you are grasping at any straws of hope that your liberal NE elietist flip flopper.

No, it was more about people's feeling's on recalls elections that aren't about an actual crime.

/Something really does need to be done about this whole Citizen's United thing. Shiat is getting way out of hand.//They're not even trying to hide the fact that elections are being bought and unfortunately a good percentage of the public either don't care or don't realize this.

Antimatter:To be fair, the GOP had a ton of outside the state funding, where as the democrats did not. This was pretty well bought and paid for by outside forces to the state, rather then the people actually in the state.

Yeah but it was all legal. Democrats didn't know that outside interests would be giving money? They should have.

Walker was duly elected, Democrats didn't like what he proposed, and they forced a recall. They lost that recall.

Democrats in Wisconsin brought his upon themselves.

I don't think it has any national meaning, no matter how much people want to make it so either way.

To be fair, the GOP had a ton of outside the state funding, where as the democrats did not. This was pretty well bought and paid for by outside forces to the state, rather then the people actually in the state.

This still doesn't jibe with how poorly Walker polled with people who voted against his recall. Face it, the recall election results were not any sort of mandate of support for Walker from the people, it was a referendum against subverting the election process for one's political gains, even if it means leaving a duly elected (yet utterly corrupt) POS like Walker in office. He needs to be beaten properly in a normal popular election.

It was a rejection and a refudiation of Demnocrats and Liberal Socialisms, and a triumph for the Republican ideal of pure, unfettered Capitalism. Saul Alinsky. The days of the LibDIMs are numbered, and in November, millions of Americans who love America will take our country back from the evil clutches of the Obamanauts, ushering in a prosperous new era of God, Family and Profits. Glory!

vernonFL:Antimatter: To be fair, the GOP had a ton of outside the state funding, where as the democrats did not. This was pretty well bought and paid for by outside forces to the state, rather then the people actually in the state.

Yeah but it was all legal. Democrats didn't know that outside interests would be giving money? They should have.

It was legal in the way that it was legal to torture people to death after Bush got caught doing it and had his lawyers shiat out a reasoning after the fact.

I think citizens united elections are good because it cuts through the middle men in our democratic process. I can't wait until we can just start voting for corporations to run things for us. HALIBURTON 2022!!!

Citrate1007:It illustrates that "citizens united" style elections can have a significant impact on elections, that people won't recall someone based on political differences alone, and that big business will start lobbying across many states to chip away at labor laws because the divide and conquer tactics worked.

As far as the presidential election...no, it doesn't mean sqaut. If you are a republican you may feel otherwise, but that is because you are grasping at any straws of hope that your liberal NE elietist flip flopper.

Exactly, what Walker did maybe should have been illegal, but it wasn't. Recalls are for the worst of the worst (though I do give Walker credit for putting forth a good argument that what he did may as well be illegal).

Correct my numbers if I'm remembering incorrectly - he won by something like a 52/46 vote. Then withstood recall with a 53/46 vote. To me, it just appears that the needle didn't move. File this one under "Uh, ok. Wisconsin still isn't much of a union-loving state right now".

vernonFL:Antimatter: To be fair, the GOP had a ton of outside the state funding, where as the democrats did not. This was pretty well bought and paid for by outside forces to the state, rather then the people actually in the state.

Yeah but it was all legal. Democrats didn't know that outside interests would be giving money? They should have.

Yes, we really shouldn't even consider going against the big money. Obedience to the every whim of the wealthy should be the basis of all policy.

It is a definite sign of things to come. If you outspend your opponent 3-4 times you are likely to win regardless of political affiliation. This is terrible news for Obama since Romney and company will only have to spend 4 billion to win the presidency.

Philip Francis Queeg:Yes, we really shouldn't even consider going against the big money. Obedience to the every whim of the wealthy should be the basis of all policy

I'm not saying that, I'm saying: If you're going to pick a fight, knowing the other side is going to play dirty, you better play to win, and they obviously didn't, since they were outspent 7 to 1, and lost.

Walker was duly elected, Democrats didn't like what he proposed, and they forced a recall. They lost that recall.

Democrats in Wisconsin brought his upon themselves.

I don't think it has any national meaning, no matter how much people want to make it so either way.

Exit polling showed that a majority of voters believed that recalls should only be done for official misconduct. The moderate independents (read: people who don't follow politics but vote anyway for some reason) may have been swayed on that issue alone.

As usual, it depends on your party affiliation. Since Walker won, the 4 Republicans on Fark will claim this has all kinds of national implications, and it's proof that Obama is done Romney is going to kick ass, while the 9000 Democrats explain that this means nothing, it was evil corporate money that triumphed, and of course, come the election in November, Obama is going to win with 75% of the vote.

If things had gone the other way, this thread would be 500 posts long, with the 9000 Democrats explaining how this is proof that no Republican will ever be elected again, and the 4 Republicans trying to brush it off as no big deal, it was evil union thuggery that kept Walker from winning, and Romney will throw Obama out on his ear in November.

Walker was duly elected, Democrats didn't like what he proposed, and they forced a recall. They lost that recall.

Democrats in Wisconsin brought his upon themselves.

I don't think it has any national meaning, no matter how much people want to make it so either way.

To be fair, the GOP had a ton of outside the state funding, where as the democrats did not. This was pretty well bought and paid for by outside forces to the state, rather then the people actually in the state.

Good for Wisconsin in getting all that outside money to pay their local radio, television and ad companies.

I wouldn't be happy if I lived in the state with the people who provided it. Sorry Kansas.

Khellendros:Correct my numbers if I'm remembering incorrectly - he won by something like a 52/46 vote. Then withstood recall with a 53/46 vote. To me, it just appears that the needle didn't move. File this one under "Uh, ok. Wisconsin still isn't much of a union-loving state right now".

Carth:It is a definite sign of things to come. If you outspend your opponent 3-4 times you are likely to win regardless of political affiliation. This is terrible news for Obama since Romney and company will only have to spend 4 billion to win the presidency.

You mean like how husband-to-a-billionairess John McCain outspent Obama? (Note: I don't think Romney will disingenuously hamstring his own fundraising efforts like McCain did, just that Obama is one hell of a fundraiser himself; he's almost a far more effective campaigner than elected official).

GentDirkly:What does any of this have to do with Citizens United?Did McCain-Feingold apply to gubernatorial elections?

McCain-Feingold applies to nothing anymore. Citizens United decision, effectively undid a lot of what McCain-Feingold had done. You just run everything through a PAC. You just can't say you have anythong to do with the PAC or co-ordinate in anyway - wink wink.

It's obviously a sign of things to come. Mitt Romney is going to sweep the electoral vote for the first time ever, and the Republicans are going to storm to veto-proof supermajorities in both the House and the Senate. The GOP will create a secret death panel service as a part of the SEALs to take down domestic terrorists, and their first targets will be Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, and Sotomayor. This will allow the Republicans to remake the Supreme Court in their image and create new legal precedents. They'll ban all abortion and birth control thanks to discovering a right to life that's protected by the Constitution. Gay marriage will be outlawed across the country as the Court finds Congress can usurp the power to define marriage by religious standards. They'll shift back to the Lochner-era interpretation of economic liberty by applying strict scrutiny to all state and federal commercial regulations and government spending programs (except for those that directly benefit multinational corporations and the rich). All government spending will shift to building up a military that can battle every other country on the planet in a unique theater simultaneously, and the military will crush all foes. We'll force all people to be subjects of the American crown. By 2016, the country will have completely devolved into a Christian feudalist dystopia, and the GOP will then suspend the Constitution and install their chosen one as Dictator-for-life over the entire planet.

vernonFL:Philip Francis Queeg: Yes, we really shouldn't even consider going against the big money. Obedience to the every whim of the wealthy should be the basis of all policy

I'm not saying that, I'm saying: If you're going to pick a fight, knowing the other side is going to play dirty, you better play to win, and they obviously didn't, since they were outspent 7 to 1, and lost.

And if you know that you will always be outspent 7 to 1 in the current environment? Then what?

Crotchrocket Slim:Khellendros: Correct my numbers if I'm remembering incorrectly - he won by something like a 52/46 vote. Then withstood recall with a 53/46 vote. To me, it just appears that the needle didn't move. File this one under "Uh, ok. Wisconsin still isn't much of a union-loving state right now".

Carth: It is a definite sign of things to come. If you outspend your opponent 3-4 times you are likely to win regardless of political affiliation. This is terrible news for Obama since Romney and company will only have to spend 4 billion to win the presidency.

You mean like how husband-to-a-billionairess John McCain outspent Obama? (Note: I don't think Romney will disingenuously hamstring his own fundraising efforts like McCain did, just that Obama is one hell of a fundraiser himself; he's almost a far more effective campaigner than elected official).

Carth:It is a definite sign of things to come. If you outspend your opponent 3-4 times you are likely to win regardless of political affiliation. This is terrible news for Obama since Romney and company will only have to spend 4 billion to win the presidency.

You are so concerned that people can't think for themselves and that $10 per person advertising will sway them, yet you let them vote. You don't seem very trusting of your fellow Americans.

beta_plus:Carth: It is a definite sign of things to come. If you outspend your opponent 3-4 times you are likely to win regardless of political affiliation. This is terrible news for Obama since Romney and company will only have to spend 4 billion to win the presidency.

You are so concerned that people can't think for themselves and that $10 per person advertising will sway them, yet you let them vote. You don't seem very trusting of your fellow Americans.